The modes he linked pics of aren’t 3nps forms. Those weren’t the “GIT” forms I was taught, but it really doesnt matter.
IMO, the best organization is CAGED system for the roadmap, and use real 3nps patterns for velocity and ability to transpose/move ideas between modes without having to change the fingering/picking.
if you want all these questions answered, there is a GREAT book called “Fretboard Roadmaps”.
I know people often think this, but I always find this weird because it assumes everyone plays all the notes of their scale fingerings in a row all the time. The minute you want to play anything other than every diatonic scale degree in a straight line, which is pretty much most phrases that are played, on average, there is no longer any “3nps” about the fingering.
For a shred person playing mainly straight-line directional scales, sure, I guess.
On another thread, I made a post about visualizing the 3NPS scales as one shape. I borrowed it from All Fourths tuning. It looks like this:
It’s a continuous repeating pattern of a shape that spans 7 strings.
Here’s how I would use it to improvise over F major:
*Note: If you cross the G-B string border, you have to shift the upper part of the shape 1 fret to the right. (Practice different bits of this shape over that border in order to ingrain this into finger memory)
If you want to jump anywhere on the fretboard, here are 2 options:
A. Look for any other F’s on the fretboard (e.g. G string, 10th fret)
B. Use octave jumps to find other F’s close by.
Then I just repeat the process (steps 1-3), but with that new F as my new “anchor” note.
Which is why I also advocate learning the arpeggios built on those forms.
The beauty of the 3nps scales is that you don’t have to do any “math” regarding fingerings or picking, its the same (with obvious exception being different scale formulas) when you move it laterally. Same is true of playing arpeggios over those shapes. Caged is not as beneficial in this regard.
I use both, but if I’m “shredding” I certainly move to the 3nps forms. Also they are brilliant for fast legato.
Just to be clear, for you “shredding” means playing linear scales? Or do you mean you use those fingerings but sometimes only playing a selection of the available notes on certain strings?
No criticism, whatever floats your boat. I’m just trying to understand what people mean when they talk about 3nps being used for “speed”.
It means that regardless of whether I am playing every scale degree or just a subset, I use those patterns when moving laterally on the board because the fingering and picking don’t change. This makes it very easy to position shift and repeat ideas in different modes.
Thank you for the book recommendation! Looks like I can grab a copy on the cheap. Will check it out 
Thanks PB! If you read earlier on in my conversations with @Ian and @dasein we went over using your root notes as guides for your scale patterns. As I am a big rock and metal guy, especially Zakk Wylde I am playing in one key basically for all my tunes. Hence the key changes we see in jazz don’t apply to what I enjoy playing (although we all wish we could be like Joe Pass).
With your strategy for jumping around which I agree with, how do you personally approach playing in modes? For instance, you’re in an A minor backing track. Do you think in terms of its parent root note of C and then focus on notes to give it that A minor sound? In your diagram using fragments, you could use all the circled 6’s as your root note for Aeolian and so if you play A minor that pattern would be 578 578 on the low E and A. But to fluently switch the root note every time I think would be quite cumbersome? Hope the question makes sense! Thx a million- Bullseye
If the backing track is in A minor, the mode is already determined (A aeolian). I just play A aeolian instead of thinking of any parent note. Of course, if the backing track was only playing an A minor chord, then I have some choices to spice it up – A aeolian, A dorian, or A phrygian.
If the root note is fret 5 on the low E – I’m playing the entire vertical shape starting from that root note.
If I wanted to play somewhere else, I would look for another A note anywhere on the fretboard, say, fret 10 on B string. That is now my new root note, but I’m still going to use the same process (10-12-13 on B, 10-12-13 on high E). Since the shape is infinite, it also extends downward – so it also includes 9-10-12 on G, 9-10-12 on D, etc…
Now if I wanted to switch positions very frequently (i.e. playing horizontally), I might use an infinite horizontal shape. I’ll draw a diagram since I don’t have it with me. I don’t practice it very often… I tend to get away with just playing the vertical shape, and occasionally shifting horizontally by ear and feel.
Hey PB! With your answer given to my first question on the A minor backing track, I assume you agree with Ian’s answer when I asked him when is A aeolian actually called A aeolian?
“When it’s played over an Am chord. Two things make a mode sound the way they do, the chord it’s being played over and the chord tones being targeted. For example let’s say you’re playing a ii-V-I progression in C (Dm7-G7-Cmaj7). The basic modes you would play over the changes are D Dorian, G Mixolydian, C Ionian. All three have the same notes and you can use the same pattern in one position but it’s the notes being targeted over each chord that give the mode its sound.”
To clarify your diagram- Is Circle #1 considered the Ionian root note no matter what? Then if we start on Circle #2 we can call that Dorian and so on? This is my understanding by looking at the chart. Based on where you start you also put the corresponding modal names too in your drawing (the patterns we all know if we start on that root note). So if you are playing over a strictly A minor backing track (no key change surprises etc.), you are using the specific Aeolian pattern in your diagram of Circles 6 71, 2 3 4. See what I mean? And from there you build.
With all that being said, that’s why I have been trying the derivative approach using the parent root note as my target (Circle #1) and building all the patterns from there. This way mentally I am not thinking in terms of modal names. Because correct me if I am wrong, if we are playing over B Locrian (C Major mode), I’d have to start on Circle #7 as my root and play the pattern 712 345 and so on spotting all the B notes.
Thx again man and look forward to that horizontal diagram for jamming… BEST
Yes, the mode is determined by what notes are being emphasized at the moment. If the backing track is in C major, and it’s currently playing the A minor chord – then it’s A aeolian. Even if you play the F “lydian” shape over that A minor chord, it’s still gonna sound A aeolian – as long as the bass is still ringing out that root note A. The bass often determines modal quality of the sound.
When the chord switches to G7, it’s going to have a Mixolydian sound no matter what notes you play from the C major scale.
Yes, circle #1 is always Ionian. circle #2 is dorian, etc. I probably should have named each circle with the mode names instead of numbers.
Well, I see 2 ways to do it:
The “Lazy” approach (no key changes)
For something like Dm7-G7-Cmaj7, you can just pick a dorian root note from that vertical shape. (I often start from the “Dorian” fragment 234-567). Then just play any random notes from the whole vertical shape. You don’t have to “spot” all the Dorian root notes. Heck, you don’t even have to spot all the G (mixolydian) or C (Ionian) root notes either… Through trial-and-error, you’ll soon feel which notes in that shape sound “good” over the chord changes.
The “Jazz” approach (following the changes)
So for Dm7-G7-Cmaj7, you think “root D… root G… root C…” Start practicing by comping (i.e. playing the chords). Then improvise melodies with notes from the chords (using chord shapes or arpeggio shapes). Then improvise using extensions or bigger chords to spice things up.
I wouldn’t bother with using a derivative approach. You don’t want to do mental calculation: “Dm7? Ok D dorian is the 2nd degree of C major, so let’s use C major scale shape, but starting from the 2nd note…”
I find it better to think “Dm7? ok let’s play D dorian shape.”
Anyway, the scale shape doesn’t seem useful for hitting chord tones. There’s too many choices. It’s best used for note density - i.e. playing fast. I see it as a way to play passing non-chord tones.
For example, I might be playing the scale shape by blazing through it with Yngwie Sixes. Does that sequence care about which note matches with the current chord? No.
So if you want to nail the chord tones, your best bet is to play chord shapes and arpeggio shapes, i.e. Approach #2.
IMO, a good solo mixes both approaches – sticking to the chord tones most of the time, and occasionally doing fast scale runs.
Thanks PB! I like the lazy approach you recommend but it makes sense for rock in terms of not many key changes, a lot of rock I like at least is played fast so it’s more about staying in key then these subtle type accents we see in other styles of music. I doubt Kerry King is concerned about these key changes versus Gilmore etc.
So one thing I’d like to clarify. You said if we’re playing over a D Dorian track then the A Aeolian pattern would sound Dorian etc. Now is this because we are staying in key for our first example? Let’s say it’s a D Dorian track and you play for argument sake a D Phrygian or D Locrian scale. Now we are in a different key. So #1. It will sound different right? Will we sound D Dorian still? #2. Would you call those 2 scales I mentioned by Phrygian or Locrian? How would you define them in such a case? On my mobile for now so apologies if any of this read weird. Cheers mate
No, I mean the entire thing sounds Dorian. Modal quality depends on everything you hear. Imagine an audience. They’re hearing “backing track + you”.
If you play A aeolian pattern with no accompaniment, just you, it’s going to sound like A aeolian (as long as you play the A note more often than the other notes).
But if you play an A aeolian pattern on top of a bass player ringing out a D note – the WHOLE sound (bass + you) sounds like D dorian.
Depends on what the track is actually playing. If it’s playing the entire D dorian scale (D,E,F,G,A,B,C), and you’re playing D phrygian (D,Eb,F,G,A,Bb,C)… Then the entire result would be (D,Eb,E,F,G,A,Bb,B,C) – which sounds kind of jarring.
But if the track is just playing chords – say a D minor chord (D,F,A) – then this chord appears in D dorian, D phrygian, and D aeolian. So you have options to change the flavor of the whole sound.
Thank you, it all makes sense! In the case of playing that D Phrygian scale over a D Dorian backing track, and it sounds jarring, would you as a musician recognize it is a Phrygian scale that is sounding bad? Or just think it’s a bum note and that’s that? Cheers!
It sounds bad to me. But you can just turn an out-of-place note into a chromatic passing tone if it sounds good to you. Things are always in motion, and you don’t usually hear all the scale notes at the same time. Depends on how you play it.
Btw here’s the horizontal shape I was talking about. It’s a 2-string pattern. I lined up the 2-string fragments below it:
Thank you for the chart PB! Check out this great cover of Darkest Hour by Gaku (killer guitar player from Japan). 1:18 in the diagram reminds me of the solo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkfzWKUnYks
1a) I don’t. I think in parallel. Lydian substitutes freely in a lot of “major” situations.
1b) There are a whole bunch of visualization discussions going on, mine is under “What the heck is FordScales?”
Not sure what the question is. How to switch smoothly between modes and/or between pentatonics?
Hmm, I think “starting and stopping points” gets folks into trouble. E.g. where is the “starting point” for the C major scale on a piano? For what it’s worth, I tend to think of scales as having notes going up and going down with the root note in the middle. Phrases comprise musical starting and stopping points.
Are they really two camps? Prescription: Learn all 3NPS scales/modes. Proscription: Don’t be overly concerned with scale patterns. Approach: Break 3NPS into two strings fragments…? You may find the FordScales thread of use to you, as it’s informed by all three concerns. Or not. Cheers, Daniel
Apologies to the thread and @BullseyeBrewtality, I saw it as a new thread.
But yeah, there is specifically the Freboard Visualization thread where folks are documenting different approaches.
And a word of caution with the modal substitutions. As several others have alluded, chord tones matter. Modal backing tracks sound a certain way because each generally has its own primary, and limited set of chords. The notes of the related scales may be the same, but how one juggles the notes and the patterns is often going to be very different with each mode.
Many of the rock players are shying away from the idea of “changes” as being irrelevant to their needs, but rock and pop tunes are full of changes at well. They just tend to be not as “out” and focus on triadic considerations rather than seventh chords. It may be the hardest thing to make musical sense in one key.
Guitar is very visual-pattern oriented, since our same-octave notes can occur in multiple places, unlike a keyboard where there is only one note named A=440. Earlier, I spent a whole thread trying to get guitarists here to see this, but most were resistant.
Scale shapes are relevant only physically, in relation to fingering. In themselves, as melodic entities, scales are not useful like “riffs” are. Riffs are constructed melodies, with rhythmic identity. Scales are not; they are just an index of notes.
Don’t practice scales for speed; practice riffs for speed. Memorize scale fingerings and shapes; that’s all they’re good for.
Additionally, I want to debunk the notion that “you have to know every note name anywhere on the fingerboard.” Note-naming is most useful on the 5th and 6th strings, for building chords in a key.
But note-naming can be replaced by relative pitch recognition within a key. If you are playing over a G7, you can know by ear what all the scale members are: root, major or minor third, fifth, seventh, etc. This is called “playing by ear” and usually the people who do it don’t think about it; they just hear it.
Also, with visual pattern recognition, riffs can be oriented by using existing patterns you already know. Example, you can use your pentatonic pattern to locate a jazz riff, by knowing something like "The riff begins on the fourth string, second finger (which is already memorized with the riff) on the fret just behind the tonic note on the second string in the “pentatonic extension” which I call “the B.B. King note.”
In this case, it is necessary to locate that “tonic reference note” very quickly, but not necessarily by note-name. You can be using visual pattern recognition for location, or even “pure ear” recognition.
If this location process is happening through very fast chord changes, It might be better to simply memorize what fret the riff starts on and “pre-plan” your solo to that degree.
Do what works for you. I don’t see a point in trying to encourage people to not learn the fretboard simply because you don’t find it useful in your playing. A student of music should learn anything and everything they can without prejudice. Music is not a competition.
